Open Letter to Tom Tancredo Supporters

The Duncan Hunter Grass Revolt ^ | 12-20-07 | SK Johnson

[thelastinkling]

Dear Tancredo Supporters:

[Swordfished]

Right now, the media is shoving several moderate candidates down our throats, and forcing the actually conservative candidates to the bottom of the race.

And what about the voters in all this - do you not blame them? Are they mindless robots programmed by the MSM in this internet age? I don't think so.

Face it, the public doesn't want the candidates you want. You can't blame the candidates for the public's lack of education or sophistication.

[Kevmo]

Nope. I clearly said that I cited it because YOU consider it so important.
***So you spend time on a thread for a candidate that you think has no chance, as you’ve done in the past, quoting data that you don’t consider important. Now THAT’s trolling.

Your “analysis” of the Dec 12 debate was that percentage change was important. Now that your guy has lost 96%, you want to go back to actual losses. Fine. I’ll point out again that Hunter Duncan never had a “30-point lead” to lose. He never had even had a 3-point lead, or any lead at all.
***OK, good enough point. But why bother? You spend so much effort on these pro-hunter threads trying to knock the guy down that it leads me to think you’re more afraid than you let on. So, your guy squanders 30 points on Intrade, and there’s no real comparison because my guy never had a 30 point lead. Good enough. It’s time to give Hunter that level of support, because he won’t squander it, he’s got the fire in the belly that your candidate lacks, and he’s idealogically more in line with the GOP platform. Of course, he’s an evangelical and we know that you have disdain for such evangelicals as Dobson, so much so that you call him a jackass. So if you want to talk about percentages vs. percentages, Hunter’s delta is already something that is in the past when it comes to the analysis that spits him out as the winner of the debate. Glad to see you accept that data. And now that his numbers are going down at a higher percentage compared to base value than thompson is something I agree is not a good thing for my candidate. If he goes back up,I’ll be revisiting this discussion with you. That could happen tomorrow. Best of luck with your candidate regaining 30 points. I know that won’t happen tomorrow.

He’s just raising a war chest for his son’s congressional run. His whole vanity campaign seems to be a fundraising farce. Good luck with that.
***If that’s true, you’re basically calling him a liar. You might want to produce evidence for that contention. On the basis of previous correspondence with you, that won’t happen.

.

.

.

According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts

[Petronski]

Troll on, trolly troll.

[HereInTheHeartland]

Duncan Hunter is a good man and I feel that he would make the best president of all the candidates; if we could get him elected.

But when I tell people who are Republicans this, and they ask “who is he”; that tells me a lot.

I don’t like having to compromise; but politics is fought in the real world.
I will make up my mind this weekend, probably will be Thompson.

[rmlew]

I'm annoyed with the Hunter campaign and have been since they were less organized tahn the Cox campaign at CPAC. That said, the idea that today's poll is inevitable is just wrong. A month ago, Huckabee was a nobody. He turned it around with a few good debate performaces, the purcahse of an email list to single-issue Chirstian voters, and with the aid of the media.

When the media lie about the positions of candidates and introduce others as fringe canddidates, what support are these to get?
When candidates win or do well in debates, but are ignored in debate reviews, what are we to do?

When voters decide not to look at facts for themselves, the Republic is lost.

[Kevmo]

I’m on a pro-hunter thread supporting my conservative candidate. I’ve been a freeper for a decade. You’re the one who’s the troll here.

I knew this prediction would come true from my previous post: On the basis of previous correspondence with you, that won’t happen.

.

.

.

According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts

[Petronski]

Trolling is not a measure of seniority or tenure, but of behavior.

Please please, enjoy a piping hot cup of trolly troll broth.

[upsdriver]

“Peddle your stuff elsewhere. Thompson is a lousy candidate.”

Yes, he is, and the Fraud is not a conservative. Never was, never will be.

[Kevmo]

The readers will notice that Petronski does not answer any questions, just the pure ad hominem attack.

[Petronski]

It’s not ad hominem to point out your ignorance of the very scientific subjects at the heart of your posts, or your trollish behavior.

[pepperhead]

LOL he called you a troll and you have been here since 98 like him.

[2ndDivisionVet]

"I really like some of your talking points. (I’m familiar with all of these positions because I have seen him three times now. I like the way you have worded them.) As long as you don’t mind, I may borrow a paragraph or two for our precinct caucus."

I would be honored if you did.

[Kevmo]

Trolling is not defined in the Freeper lexicon, which is probably why you like to hide behind it.

Whenever it gets to this with Petronski on pro-fred threads, the abuse button gets hit because he’s so thin-skinned. His posts usually survive. It’s pure baiting behavior. The deck is stacked on Pro-fred threads, so now we’ll see if the deck is stacked on pro-Hunter threads.

Nope. I clearly said that I cited it because YOU consider it so important.
***So you spend time on a thread for a candidate that you think has no chance, as you’ve done in the past, quoting data that you don’t consider important. Now THAT’s trolling.

Your “analysis” of the Dec 12 debate was that percentage change was important. Now that your guy has lost 96%, you want to go back to actual losses. Fine. I’ll point out again that Hunter Duncan never had a “30-point lead” to lose. He never had even had a 3-point lead, or any lead at all.
***OK, good enough point. But why bother? You spend so much effort on these pro-hunter threads trying to knock the guy down that it leads me to think you’re more afraid than you let on. So, your guy squanders 30 points on Intrade, and there’s no real comparison because my guy never had a 30 point lead. Good enough. It’s time to give Hunter that level of support, because he won’t squander it, he’s got the fire in the belly that your candidate lacks, and he’s idealogically more in line with the GOP platform. Of course, he’s an evangelical and we know that you have disdain for such evangelicals as Dobson, so much so that you call him a jackass. So if you want to talk about percentages vs. percentages, Hunter’s delta is already something that is in the past when it comes to the analysis that spits him out as the winner of the debate. Glad to see you accept that data. And now that his numbers are going down at a higher percentage compared to base value than thompson is something I agree is not a good thing for my candidate. If he goes back up,I’ll be revisiting this discussion with you. That could happen tomorrow. Best of luck with your candidate regaining 30 points. I know that won’t happen tomorrow.

He’s just raising a war chest for his son’s congressional run. His whole vanity campaign seems to be a fundraising farce. Good luck with that.
***If that’s true, you’re basically calling him a liar. You might want to produce evidence for that contention. On the basis of previous correspondence with you, that won’t happen.

.

.

.

According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts

[Kevmo]

You’re just baiting.

.

.

.

According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts

[Kevmo]

Huckabee hasn’t won any debates. His surge has been solely based on his personality and humor as perceived by Joe six pack.
***I posted on the official discussion threads that by looking at the deltas in the Intrade results before & after the debate, it spit out Huckabee as the winner. Thompson was the loser of at least one. That’s an unbiased, objective analysis if it generates a candidate that I didn’t support as the winner. Have you ever posted such an analysis? Probably not.

After winning these debates, Huckster’s poll numbers rose. It may have an element of the Joe SixPack as you maintain, but it’s mostly the evangelical crowd. It was forecast before the huckster rise in this article...

Jill Stanek: Behind the scenes at FRC Briefing (Family Research Council)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1915901/posts

.

.

According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts

[Swordfished]

When voters decide not to look at facts for themselves, the Republic is lost.

It's already lost, for the reason you state - dumb voters. In a better Republic, there would be voting tests for both intelligence and how informed the voter is.

[thelastinkling]

Well, people said the same about Huckabee until a few weeks ago. Things can change in seconds if just a few people remain committed.